Login or Register to make a submission.

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  • The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
  • Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  • The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.



The format of the full papers for the NJRST is shown below:



 (Left Text Alignment, Book Antiqua, Font Size 12, Bold Characters)



Authors Names should be comprised of Initials and Surname.

E.g. A.T.Sindano1, Author2, and Author3*

(Left Text Alignment, Book Antiqua, Font Size 10, Bold Characters)


Authors’ Affiliated Institution’s Name

1Department, Institution, Country

2 Department, Institution, Country

3 Department, Institution, Country

(Left Text Alignment, Book Antiqua, Font Size 10, Regular Characters)


All the Authors Contact Details

E.g. name@xxxx.com; Tel and Cell: (Area Code) Number

(Left Text Alignment, Book Antiqua, Font Size 10, Regular Characters)



A brief summary of a research article and it must help the reader quickly ascertain the paper's purpose (250 to 300 words)

 (Left Text Alignment, Book Antiqua, Font Size 12, Regular Characters)


Please note: a maximum number of 10 key words must be below the abstract



The body of the full paper to be considered for publication must contain the following headers;


The Introduction should (i) describe the question tested by the experiments described in the paper, (ii) explain why this is an interesting or important question, (iii) describe the approach used in sufficient detail that a reader who is not familiar with the technique will understand what was done and why, and (iv) very briefly mention the conclusion of the paper.


Materials and Methods

The Materials and Methods section should succinctly describe what was actually done. It should include description of the techniques used so someone could figure out what experiments were actually done. The details of a published protocol do not need to be reproduced in the text but an appropriate reference should be cited – e.g., simply indicate “were done as described by Hughes et al. (4)”. Any changes from the published protocol should be described. It is not appropriate to indicate volumes of solutions added – instead indicate the relevant information about the experiment such as final concentrations used, etc.



 Begin each paragraph with an opening sentence that tells the reader what question is being tested in the experiments described in that paragraph. Write the opening sentence in bold font for emphasis. (Sometimes a complete sentence is used and sometimes a short phrase is used. either style is OK but the style should be used consistently throughout the manuscript.) Any results that include multiple data points that are critical for the reader to evaluate the experiment should be shown in tables or figures. However, the results should be summarized in accompanying text. When referring to a particular table or figure, they should be capitalized (e.g., Table 1, Figure 6, etc.) The text of the Results section should be succinct but should provide the reader with a summary of the results of each table or figure. Not all results deserve a separate table or figure. As a rule of thumb, if there are only a few numerical results or a simple conclusion describe the results in the text instead of in a table or figure.

Your paper should focus on what worked, not things that did not work (unless they didn’t work for reasons that are interesting and provide biological insights).





The discussion section, often the most difficult to write, should be relatively easy if the previous suggestions have been followed. In particular, look to the last paragraph of the introduction. If the work has characterized a phenomenon by studying specific effects, use the results to describe each effect in separate paragraphs. If the work has presented a hypothesis, use the results to construct a logical argument that supports or rejects your hypothesis. If the work has identified three main objectives for the work, use the results to address each of these objectives. A well-defined study that is described in the Introduction, along with supporting results that are presented in the Results section, should ease the construction of the Discussion section. Begin the Discussion section with a brief paragraph that again gives an overview to the work. Summarize the most important findings and, if applicable, accept or reject the proposed hypothesis. Next, identify the most interesting, significant, remarkable findings that were presented in the Results section, and contrast these findings in light of other studies reported in the literature. It is often informative if a discussion of the potential weaknesses of the interpretation is also included. Finally, at the end of the Discussion section, consider the other works in the literature that address this topic and how this work contributes to the overall field of study.




Again, first introduce the work and then briefly state the major results. Then state the major points of the discussion. Finally, end with a statement of how this work contributes to the overall field of study



Provide a brief statement acknowledging the efforts of any participants or consultants who are not included as authors of the manuscript. State all of the funding sources for the work, ensuring that the statement adheres to the guidelines provided by the funding institution.





Strictly use APA (American Psychological Association) referencing style




Kindly take note of the following:

  • The abstract in the full paper must be between 250 to 300 words. (Including the Title, Authors, Affiliated institution, corresponding authors contact details, body of the abstract, keywords)
  • Papers must be submitted in Microsoft Word
  • Abbreviations, other than those that form part of standard nomenclature, should be defined in full at the point of first mention. Abbreviations used in the title should be defined in full in the body of the abstract
  • Please check your paper text carefully for typographical, grammatical and other errors.
  • Please note that the papers must not exceed 6000 words excluding references. It must contain a maximum of 6 tables and figures.